HeckTender

Hmmm... a stealth buff or a bug? I can't wait to find out!

Still would have liked to see fixes to Smoke Grenade to be autohit or not suppress stealth, but I'm definitely a bit more excited about ignite now!

[ QUOTE ]
A few tips for those confused by safeguard missions.

<ul type="square">[*]You have 5 minutes from the time you enter the mission until the bank starts getting robbed. [*]If you get to close to the bank the robbery starts even if your 5 minutes are not up.[*] There will be a villain plus looters racing for the vault. If you can stop them before the vault door is destroyed the rest of the mission is casual.[*] If the vault door is destroyed you must stop every one in the bank. Best two options for this are stay outside and get them as they exit, or intercept them as they head to their get away point.[*] If you get everything in the bank and the mission didn't complete race outside and for the get away point. One or more of the robbers escaped.[*]Once the mission complete happens the 15 minute timer starts. [*] You gain time for stopping vandels[*] You gain time for stopping various side missions from occuring[*] All side missions will be keyed by the same villain type as did the robbery.[/list]
[/ QUOTE ]

First thank you for posting this in such a concise and easy to understand way. I went into my first SG mission "blind" I hadn't done any Mayhem missions, and I had no idea what to expect other than what I got from the contact.

Me: Ice/Axe Tank lvl 50 (solo)

Going in all I know is that there is a bank robbery starting soon, that I can add time for defeating vandals and doing side-missions.

I enter the mission and not wanting to fight malta just for the "fun" of it, I simply head straight for the bank.

1st indication of a problem: I get attacked several times bounding over there at distances from mobs that would generally never aggro on me. I shrug off the attacks, and keep going to the bank.

Just as I enter the bank a group of theives are running for the door.

2nd problem: The text had stated that I would have 5 minutes. Why would a game lie to a person? I figured that at most I would stop them early in the process and at worst would have to actually sit around and wait for them.

So, luckily I have a good solo build and aggro control, so as soon as the Carnies come anywhere near the door they're on me like glue (how I heart Chilling Embrace). I defeat all the Carnies and complete the mission. At this point I'm so ingrained to click Exit Mission that I had to practically grab my clicking finger with my other hand to stop myself from exiting. I had heard about exiting Mayhem missions and knew better. Hopefully it would have warned me, but if not I can guarantee a lot of people will click exit mission and wonder whatever happened to side missions.

So, speaking of side missions: Immediately after defeating the robbers, I get a message about vandals. I head over to the vandals and defeat them all with no problem, and get more time. So, now once again I'm sitting around wondering what to do. I see the arachnos "chopper" on my map and check that out but am unable to enter. Okay, I guess that's not the side mission. I see more messages of vandals and defeat them... Are those the "side missions"? What's going on? Finally, I ask my SG how I do side-missions and they tell me to find and defeat Ring Mistress spawns.

MAJOR PROBLEM: how in blue blazes was I supposed to know to defeat Ring Mistress spawns? Did I glom over that in the mission description? Was I supposed to just start clearing the entire board and figure it out eventually? The fact that side-missions have to be earned via a secret mechanism annoys the heck out of me, but after hopping around a bit (under constant fire because of the crazy perception/aggro bug - but ignoring it because I'm a giant block of ice) I find a Ring Mistress spawn and take it out.

Success! A side-mission and stil about 5 minutes to spare. I head to the mission and start looking for glowies. Thankfully these spawns do not have the aggro AI bug of outdoor spawns so I'm able to deactivate most of the bombs without having to fight. The mission map, BTW is really awesome. It's a shame that it took until Issue 8 before we had multi-tile maps, but I'm glad it's finally here (went from sewers through a tunnel and into an office building)

After I get out, I begin searching for another Ring Mistress spawn. I find another one, but for some reason this one is just frakin' impossible. First I aggro a Malta spawn at least 50-100 yards away, which I don't notice until I am sapped-&gt;perma held-&gt;hospital. I go back, Freeze the Sapper with my Ice Hold defeat him, and the next thing I know I'm held again. This time I don't even know what held me. I've been held by Carnies before *when on 8 PERSON TEAMS* but never solo. I don't think they drained me, I think they just overcame my hold protection. Hospital -&gt; run back defeat Ring Mistress and in trying to sweep up her minions run out of time.

Conclusions:
1) Why aren't we given the quoted information by the game in a straight-forward manner. It would have prevented some frustration, and if I weren't in an active SG/Coalition, I never would have figured it out

2) I don't mind Carnies and malta combined, as long as I can manage them by the usual methods of monitoring my distance and being careful to not over aggro. The "auto-aggro" bug must be fixed

3) Has mob hold mag gone up? I was being held much much easier than in any other PvE experience. Is this by design? Maybe I'll get those "held" badges after all.

4) Change "key" system to "defeat x" or simply assign the side missions after x time after main mission completion, preferrably where x=0.

It started out fun if confusing and I really liked the new sewer/tunnel/office map, and I do enjoy a challenge, but if I wanted to be perma-held to death I would have rolled a Hami. I have a feeling that it will be more fun the next time now that I've learned a few things. It's not DOOM, but the aggro thing really really should get looked at, as well as mob hold mags.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Good in theory, not so much in reality.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bingo. That pretty much nails our design on bases. We're slowly but surely making additions and changes based on feedback &amp; data. We'll get there...I think bases are a case study where a design didn't mesh well with actual gameplay! For some odd reason, some posters have thought my Serious Games speech blamed the players; heck no! Bases are 100% a DESIGN problem. Not a player problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

I can see why they would think that from your replies on the matter as well. You seem to cast the problem not as "costs too high" but as "percieved value to low." In other words the design was fine, but players don't value their "community" enough to contribute to it.

Regardless I'm glad that progress continues on bases. I've started really getting into the design of my very small SG base for the first time recently and I know one feature I would really appreciate would be something along the lines of a base template. In costume creation it's sometimes helpful to use the random feature for inspiration. It would be a lot easier to personalize a standard design rather than having to start from scratch.

[ QUOTE ]

You're gonna make Turret TP-able again?.....duh duh duuuuuuhhhhh



[/ QUOTE ]

Well, my chances of being dissappointed by whatever the change is will be pretty high, but if all the change amounts to is fixing what amounts to a bug (given that making AT non-TPable was an unintended side-effect of the change) that will just suck.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
A very minor improvement for Gadgets...I mean, Devices! (Yeah, it was a dumb mistake -- typing in haste and all of that.)

[/ QUOTE ]

/em crosses fingers that this "minor improvement" includes a minor damage boost to Targeting Drone to compensate for the nuetering this set has been through and it's evident lack of a Build Up type power.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not me, I'm hoping for that "minor" improvement to be Smoke Grenade not suppressing Stealth or being Auto-hit or both. Ever since I started my /dev blaster I've felt that SG is the key to the set and right now that key is stuck in the garbage disposal.

Nisse (or gnomes) are part of Scandinavian folklore. According to here: "In Scandinavian folklore, a "household spirit" responsible for the care and prosperity of a farm. A nisse was usually described as a short man (under four feet tall) wearing a red cap with a tassel."

He fits *perfectly* with my Norse Viking!

[ QUOTE ]
Evidently, the costs exceed the perceived value of creating one's own HQ

[/ QUOTE ]
No, the costs mathematically exceed my ability to earn it. (as the member of a two person SG)

You don't see complaints about Costumes? May I suggest an experiment? Force all characters to only be able to use a single costume/body model when they start the game. Allow them to only change the color. Then eye-gougingly gradually allow them to earn the influence necessary to use additional costume items. After a few levels I might be able to afford one different boot type for instance. Now check back with the boards and see if they're compaining.

If they needed inspiration for base creation I don't know why they didn't look at the widely-recognized best feature of CoH - the character creation. They should have allowed all heroes the ability to create an entirely non-functional base outside of SGs at level 1 using any and all base sizes and every non-functional item available. Then as the player progresses he gets to unlock actual new features of the bases. Whether this gets tied to badges or levels or whatevre doesn't really matter. The point is that people want to "own" stuff, as Statesman recognizes, and right now people don't feel like they "own" their bases, because 99% of the player base doesn't have any input into how their SG base looks or acts.

It's amazing to me that CoH can be so good at one player-content feature (costumes) and so poor at another (bases). For some reason they just didn't see them as parralel - which is bizarre because even on Comicbook culture the base is often just as "signature" as the costume. Superman's Fortress of Solitude, Batman's Batcave, etc.

[ QUOTE ]
Multiply the numbers by the base AT mods and you will have very simular numbers. The dmg by the Tanker however is slower not lower due to the powers having longer recharge and heftier end recharge. What the Tanker loses in speed he gains in the ability to take a shot that would 1 shot all but the most sturdy Scrappers. The less likely to die bit does give them a home on an AV team because they don't have to be baby sat by the Conts/Defs as much.

The big issue is our inherent should work to some degree not be completely be ignored so that a Tanker that wants to go full out "Heavy Assault Scrapper" on an AV or GM will have most of it's attention so it looks for alternate targets a lot less.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, given that we agree that the tanker inherent should work against an AV, there's not really any point to me side-tracking the discussion by addressing your Scrapper vs. Tanker example. Suffice it to say that no examples of Tankers out-damaging Scrappers you could give me would convince me as a team-builder to choose a tauntless Tanker over a Scrapper if I felt we were lacking damage in the team make-up, now that we know Tanker gauntlet is not affecting the AV.

[ QUOTE ]
[TANKER TEST] Myrmydon: Interesting. A Scranker can contribute to a team as well as or better than a Scrapper

[/ QUOTE ]

Not sure what you're trying to say. No one is argueing that a Tanker can make a somewhat unique contribution on non-AV teams. They under-damage Scrappers, but they control aggro and are less likely to die. The point is that if a non-Taunt tanker can't tank an AV, what point does a tank have in an AV battle. The answer clearly is none. A tanker's sole and singular pupose in an AV battle is to keep aggro. The tanker's inherent doesn't allow him to do that. Sure a tank can contribute damage, but it will be less damage than other ATs with *nothing* to compensate for that lack.

[ QUOTE ]
It has been this way for a loooooong time, it's nothing new. Certain levels of enemies are simply too smart to fall for the old "I hit you, so now you hate me" level of taunt.

[/ QUOTE ]

So does that mean the statute of limitation has passed on this particular steath nerf? Basically if the devs are stealthy enough then by the time the wider player base starts to sit up and take notice of a stealth nerf, the devs can simply say, "that's old news, nothing to see here." Very clever way of dodging responsibility.

(PS, I'll grant that Castle did say he'd "pay attention" to it, forgive me for being skeptical that this will translate into any actual change.)

'k read the whole thread and I have a question: Does anyone know how long the construction takes without any hero interference? In other words, how big or small is the window. Is it 60 seconds every x (random interval) or 5 minutes or what. I do three or four laps around the spawn sites every day I log in, and have been for weeks, and I've yet to see the construction site.

Great program. Are you interested in feature requests? I certainly understand if you're not really interested in working on this more, as it is essentially "done."

One problem is that it's still hard to really see what my def looks like throughout a battle. What I would really like is the ability to "model" a battle.

I'm imagining a system where I'm given the opportunity to enter the number of targets at each activation of EA. So, I enter the number of recharge's then I'm given a list of rows where I can enter the number of targets each 31.15 (3 recharge) seconds, for instance.

As it is now, it's easy to find out that I have ~9% def for the first 30 seconds, but it's not really possible to see what I will have total for for the next 30 seconds if it only hits 4 the next time without changing the number of hit targets and then adding the ramp-up times manually.

Anyway, it's a great program. One thing it's nice to see numbers for is the enhanced value of def enh. the more foes you hit. I know that you've been advocating no def enhancers until HOs, but it seems to me that if a tanker knows that he'll always teaming, or always herding when solo then it might make sense to slot for def because of the higher number of targets hit.

Since I dropped Whirling Axe and Icicles I almost never herd, and I'm usually solo which means that I'm almost never hitting more than 4-5 targets, which means even in a best case scenario three slots would only give me ~2% def.

Interesting stuff, thanks again!

[ QUOTE ]


...But you know what they say about assuming.

[/ QUOTE ]

It makes an 'a**' out of 'u' and 'ming'?

I know this isn't a guide to "aggro" or "hate" but I just read this: Bridger on AV AI changes
In the UK forums and it pointed to something I hadn't heard about before which is that "hate" has an AT modifier that would seem to indicate that even without Taunt in either power or gauntlet form Tanks would still generate the majority of the aggro because of their AT modifier.

If that's true it makes me think that the only reason Taunt was invented was because programming mechanics made it impossible for "hate" to be an AoE?? Anyway, interesting info that I hadn't heard before.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Does it strike anyone particularly odd that when the Arena and PvP first came out that Tanks were king of the mountain. Too powerful and relatively unstoppable. A few minor "tweaks" later here we stand. Castle poking fun at our bottom dwelling state. From one extreme to the other.

[/ QUOTE ]

Where did I poke fun at Tankers? Where did I state tankers were 'bottom' of the list. I suspect there is a bit of transference going on in your comments.

FWIW, reduced Toggle Drops and Gauntlet working in PvP should help tankers teaming ability. If those don't set them within the 'acceptable' range, then we'll try something else.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe there is a bit of projection going on, but your comments were just a tad bit vague (is there any other kind of dev response?), so you'll just have to pardon us for a bit of conjecture. Aren't you used to your every word being parsed yet?

From Castle's post :

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think you're letting your ATist rhetoric blind you to the point that Castle's list strictly discusses solo PvP, which he explicitly qualifies. Furthermore, he goes on to vaguely suggest that PvP-performance hierarchy is wholly different on teams -- which is ostensibly what PvP is built around.

[/ QUOTE ]

In team play, most AT's are within 30% of one another. The few exceptions should be looked at. Defenders, Controllers, Corruptors and Dominators are NOT at the bottom of this list, by any stretch.

"Release the numbers" -- I can't. It really is proprietary info, and the generalities I'm providing are about as far as I can go.

"OMG! He's nerfing EM!" -- Nope, at least not for I7.

[/ QUOTE ]

Could it be that tankers are the exception that are going to be "looked at" in terms of PvP?

[ QUOTE ]

(My italics), no this would create a different problem, needs to be done based on the number of accounts not the number of members. A SG with 10 members with 5 alts each is not the same as one with 50 members and can afford a lot less. I seem to remember from a previous thread that this would be very tricky to implement, but it needs looking at.

Mr Minotaur 50 stone/axe tank Freedom
Black hole sun 40 dark/thermal corruptor Protector
and 70+ others including 2 more CoH 50s and 2 more CoV 40s

[/ QUOTE ]

True, # of accounts would be better, or if not feasible, amount of presitge or total amount of playtime would each work better than # of toons.

I also want to add one more thing. I think the tone of Posi's post was a little negative. To say that they were "completely made up" is needlessly hostile. I don't think it's very likely that Lektrik used a random number generator to come up with his figures. I 'd be willing to bet that the guesses were based on experience with today's item costs not "completely made up."

[ QUOTE ]

Just so you all realize, the prices Lektrik wrote are completely made up.

Everything in this issue will be "reasonably priced". It doesn't make sense for us to set out to help small supergroups and then charge large supergroup Prestige for the items.

[/ QUOTE ]

Where would we have gotten the impression that it was your goal to "help small supergroups." It's nice to hear that it is your goal, but if you really want to help small supergroups set base items on a sliding scale based on SG size. Even though I figured that the "million price tag" post was just conjecture, it seemed to me like a more or less reasonable guess based on the current price of items.

Maybe they think that the stacking bug and the moving target bugs cancel each other out! Gauntlet seems like an effect where the devs tried to stretch the game engine jut a bit farther than it was designed to go. If it's cauing all these nasty side effects (the stacking is a reult of gauntlet too, I've heard) maybe just maybe they'll decide that Gauntlet is a crappy inherent, and will give us a real one (I'm a big fan of the less teammates health = more res one myself) and then all of us TWT (tanks without taunt) will have a reason to put taunt back in our builds.